|
David:
I am not sure if we really want to leave the following
unchanged in the schema:
1.
<import
namespace="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#"
schemaLocation="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-msg/schema/xmldsig-core-schema.xsd"/>
2.
<import
namespace="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" schemaLocation="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-msg/schema/xlink.xsd"/>
3.
<import
namespace="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
schemaLocation="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-msg/schema/envelope.xsd"/>
With respect to
#1 above, please see
I think we should be referencing the official version of
xmldsig-core-schema.xsd instead of the snapshot we have been maintaining at our
web site.
With respect to #2 above, I am not able to find any official
xlink.xsd on the W3C web site. We will have to continue to use our own version
located at our web site unless someone can identify the location for an official
version of xlink.xsd.
With respect to #3 above, please see
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200202/msg00056.html
We may want to use "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
as the schema location since that is the official SOAP 1.1 schema. The only
potential issue is that the former includes Annotation and you have previously
mentioned that some parsers used by members of the interop team cannot deal with
Annotation.
I also notice two minor problems in the References
section:
1. The correct URL for BPSS should be http://www.ebxml.org/specs/ebBPSS.pdf
2. Xlink has been a W3C Recommendation since June 27, 2001.
See http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink/
-Arvola
Ian,
Here is
what we have at the moment. I have included both an MSWord document and
a PDF. The PDF has change control off and the MSWord has it on.
I did
not accept the changes from Rev A so both Rev A and Rev B changes
show. In my copy, Rev A changes are in Blue and Rev B changes are in
Red. In MSWord, if you put your cursor over the change, it will say
"David V Fischer" on the Rev A changes and "David Fischer" on the Rev B
changes. It would probably be appropriate, if anyone wants to make quick
comments in the next day or so, to use the line numbers in the
PDF.
I don't
think either of these documents is appropriate to vote on. Arvola
said he would review the schema (Appendix A) and let me know what further
changes I need to make to align with his copy.
I don't
know where we are on the change control document. I have not looked at
anything since Rev A but I have made a couple of changes based upon the
conference calls and the eMail list (mostly related to Errata locations and
OPTIONAL treatment and Chris' item 229). The easiest way to see these is
to look for changes marked in red (at least it is red on my
PC).
One
final thought. If we vote on this and it passes, I would like to suggest
we change the version of the last document to v1.9 and this one to
v2.0.
Regards,
David
Fischer
Drummond
Group
ebXML-MS
Editor.
|